The legal requirement for a person walking a dog to remove dog feces deposited on city streets has been established for many years and there have been numerous prior attempts to provide suitable implements.
Early proposals involving mechanical contrivances often with linked moving parts, requiring cleaning after use have been largely superseded by numerous attempts to provide simpler, less expensive and cumbersome, disposable implements which can be more readily carried by the dog owner and permit feces removal in a sanitary manner and with minimal embarrassment. However, such prior attempts are not considered to be wholly satisfactory successful.
For example, although U.S. Pat. No. 4,186,955 issued to Campbell in 1980 teaches a scoop and paddle formed from a single cardboard blank, the numerous folding steps would increase costs and require, for convenience, that the implement be carried in folded form, the several layers increasing thickness, reducing pocketability. The user also grasps the inside of a rear wall of the scoop increasing risk of inadvertent contact with the feces during use.
Whilst, U.S. Pat. No. 4,251,097 issued to Whitten in 1981 also teaches a scoop formed from a blank, in addition to several folding steps, erection requires flap portions to be threaded into interlocking relation with a common slot which requires some manual dexterity and can be inconveniently time consuming on the street.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,039,148 issued to Brautovich in 1991 teaches a scoop which can be carried in folded flat condition of less than one-eighth thickness. However, a complex, multipart construction is taught requiring assembly of several different materials and therefore relatively expensive to manufacture.
Although U.S. Pat. No. 4,909,553 issued to Hantover in 1990, discloses formation of two (identical) scoop/paddle structures from a single cardboard blank, the patent also teaches that the implement be carried in folded condition about a bag with the plural layers increasing bulk and reducing pockectablity, while to scavenge feces, the user grasps the inner surface of a bottom wall which also increases risk of inadvertent contact with the feces.
In particular, none of the above implements provide handles extending clear of a receptacle portion of the scoop to enable the user to effectively manipulate the implement or scoop while maintaining his hand safely remote from risk of contact and contamination by the feces.